I know Multiregional theory support has died down, but am curious to see which theory you support and why. Personally I find Out Of Africa to be a better theory in many aspects, although the model still has flaws causing contradictions to arise, such as DNA evidence suggesting Homo sapiens interbreeding with Homo neanderthalensis and Homo erectus. The flaws in the Multi-regional theory however are much greater. Looking at the differences between Arfican and non- African populations, it can be seen the Multi-regional theory falls apart as it relies heavily on the idea of gene flow between Asian, European, and African populations. However, DNA evidence has backed up the claim of African populations having very little or even no gene flow with European and Asian populations, hence no Neanderthal DNA is found in African populations. If gene flow was present you would expect there to be even if no Neanderthals inhibited Africa. So what do you think? I've only touched on the flaws of both theories, but post your viewpoint!

Why "out of Africa" must be a contradiction to "multi-regional origin"? Our reasoning should reflect facts and findings not ideological wishes. The biggest forgery in palaeontology was done at the beginning of XX century in UK to keep origin of Man in Europe... It is primitive and hopeless. Personally I am totally indifferent to where humans came from but I am curious, I would like to know...Apart from that, it is possible that many waves of migration mixed with each other after coming out of Africa...Best regards

I'm not certain that the 'Out of Africa' theory precludes multiregional migration, in fact I think it's predicated on it. The qualifier is that it started in Africa. Of course as a species from an extant line which probably underwent adaptive radiation, it gets a bit complicated with the other, now extinct, human like species that were our closest living relatives (neaderthals, Denisovans, etc).